Gerbils,
Sorry, I didn't follow the last MK accident and can't answer that specific question. I'd suggest, though, that the 30+ pages on here re the Halifax crash are a good example of the "collective minds" at work.
Whether the thoughts coming out of those minds are worth professional consideration is up to individual readers to judge, but I think the professionals can, each in their field, separate wheat from chaff.
If you go back over this thread you'll find that, early on, much was made of possible overloading. Possible? I'm being diplomatic. As it happened, that was the first thing to be conked on the head by the investigation team.
Then it was MK's working hours. That debate continues and, if the volume of informed comment on here is anything to go by, exhaustion could well be a contributing cause.
What collective intelligence seems to boil it down to, at least so far, is takeoff thrust settings which were not sufficient to get the aircraft off the ground within the field length.
Crew exhaustion is not going to go away because of this accident. You can work against it but, until you win the battle, for now it's a fact of life.
That is the crux of the real message and it will not take the months to come before the official report comes out for tired cargo flight deck people to remind themselves and each other to check again, remember the Halifax MK.
This accident, and this thread, may eventually turn out to be pprune classics in the sense that they have made people throughout the industry think.
A note to Rockhound.
Don't know if the photo's still there in one of the early pages, but it clearly showed gear tracks leading from the end of the runway and becoming deeper on their way up the berm.
(just checked the first fifteen pages and didn't find the photo. It must have been a link from a news site. But the tracks were quite clear)
Last edited by broadreach; 27th Nov 2004 at 20:01.